From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759635AbXGDJnt (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 05:43:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757370AbXGDJnk (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 05:43:40 -0400 Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:45787 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757019AbXGDJnj (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 05:43:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 10:49:54 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Robert Hancock Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata_acpi: A different strategy for using ACPI information Message-ID: <20070704104954.16812248@the-village.bc.nu> In-Reply-To: <468AE196.9070202@shaw.ca> References: <468AE196.9070202@shaw.ca> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 2.9.1 (GTK+ 2.10.8; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Organization: Red Hat UK Cyf., Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, Y Deyrnas Gyfunol. Cofrestrwyd yng Nghymru a Lloegr o'r rhif cofrestru 3798903 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Looks fairly reasonable to me. However, I suspect any use of _GTM is > somewhat dangerous (at least after the resume) unless we use the _STM > and _GTF methods in the proper sequence when resuming. (Is that in the > -mm tree now?) Yes - and we only use it in these drivers to check for cable evidence not for anything more serious. > speed we give it is valid, since there is no sane way for the function > to indicate failure. (Thus the problem with the "cram in all possible > values to see what it supports" strategy for determining mode limits..) The spec I have says it'll hand back the mode it actually uses which is effectively a solution for 'failure'